RSWG

Summary

The RSWG held a virtual meeting to discuss the adoption of the "Math in RFCs" proposal, address outstanding issues on the group’s issue tracker—specifically regarding author ethics and Artificial Intelligence (AI)—and identify potential future work items including the semantics of the "Updates" header and the mutability of RFC metadata.

Key Discussion Points

Math in RFCs (draft-rswg-math-in-rfcs)

Adoption Status: Alexis Rossi noted that the call for adoption is ongoing. The only outstanding feedback was an editorial suggestion from Carsten Bormann to soften language in the introduction.
Cost and Resources: Mark Nottingham inquired about the technical resources and cost-benefit analysis of implementing math support. Robert Sparks clarified that the plan is to reuse existing MathML and SVG libraries rather than inventing a bespoke layout language. Jean Mahoney noted the RPC has not yet evaluated the impact on editor resources.
Tooling and Accessibility: Robert Sparks and Pete Resnick acknowledged that while HTML and PDF formats handle math well via libraries, plain text remains a challenge as no libraries render complex math to text effectively. Jay Daley suggested that LaTeX-style math within Markdown could serve as a machine-readable and accessible text fallback.
Policy vs. Implementation: Paul Hoffman argued that potential future changes in math libraries should not block adoption, as RFC policies are updatable. Martin Dürst suggested that, initially, the burden of providing text-only versions might fall on authors.

Author Ethics and AI

Issue Tracker: Brian Carpenter highlighted the need to clean up the existing issue list, specifically noting the relevance of AI in authorship.
Jurisdiction: A significant debate occurred regarding whether the RSWG or individual streams should define authorship rules. Paul Hoffman argued that RSWG should focus on publication policy and not dictate stream-entry requirements. Jay Daley and Mark Nottingham countered that a consistent definition of "author" and metadata semantics is beneficial for the entire series.
Authenticity: Martin Dürst raised concerns regarding the use of "real names" versus pseudonyms or nicknames in the series.
Proposed Draft: Brian Carpenter agreed to update a decade-old draft on author ethics to include 2026-era concerns like AI and submit it to the RSWG.

Future Work: Updates, Metadata, and Errata

"Updates" Semantics: Paul Hoffman suggested the group address the long-standing ambiguity of the "Updates" header. Robert Sparks noted that Pete Resnick would follow up with Mirja Kühlewind and Suresh Krishnan regarding their expired work on this topic.
Internet-Draft References: Paul Hoffman discussed the potential for a policy change regarding normative references to Internet-Drafts. Jean Mahoney noted this is often treated as a stream-specific issue (e.g., IETF stream).
Mutable Metadata: Jay Daley and Alexis Rossi discussed the problem of "wrong" information in published RFCs, such as hard-coded status (e.g., a BCP that has been obsoleted but still says BCP in the header) and the difficulty of applying simple errata. Alexis Rossi suggested exploring ways to make certain metadata mutable without moving to a "living document" model.

Decisions and Action Items

Adoption Call: The call for adoption for draft-rswg-math-in-rfcs will run until a week from tomorrow.
Action Item: Brian Carpenter to update and submit a draft regarding author ethics and AI (to be named draft-carpenter-rswg-author-ethics or similar).
Action Item: Chairs (Pete Resnick and Robert Sparks) to contact Mirja Kühlewind and Suresh Krishnan regarding their previous work on the "Updates" tag.

Next Steps

The group will consider a face-to-face meeting in Vienna to facilitate broader engagement with stream managers and the IAB/IESG.
Interested participants are encouraged to sketch out specific topics regarding metadata mutability and errata overhaul for future discussion.

Automatic IETF Minutes